Synopsis: There are currently 6 billion of us ravaging our world and whether one is ignorant of ecological reality or not; the fact remains there are limits to how many humans this planet can support.

Those who argue zero population growth is not something we must collectively
strive for as a species do so out of their own ignorance. For them, we do not know how many people the planet can support
prosperously, so why fret?

The second economic
argument for reducing the growth rate stems from the fact that large numbers of individuals entering the workforce create
a downward pressure on wages. This exacerbates unemployment and can again be dealt with if the growth rate is lowered. In
poorer nations there are simply far too many individuals seeking too few jobs; having a direct effect on overall poverty.

The fact of the matter is quite
simple: in order to create a society in which everyone has the ability to reach her or his potential; a world in which at
least a handful of the other organisms inhabiting it are not driven to extinction; then One Womb Two Children!
must not be just a slogan, it must become a way of life.

These two economic arguments of
course, are only a sliver of the complete reasoning for creating agencies which promote contraception, and educate the ignorant
in both the industrialized and developing worlds of the necessity of achieving a state of zero population growth worldwide.

The drive in overpopulated nations
should be in educating all women of the reasoning for only having two children at this point in spacetime. If
they are unable to have children then they should consider adoption as opposed to fertility drugs.

This is very much a "female thing".
The "mother" is being "raped" and "violated" by our ravenous species and in order for us to create some sense of balance,
the females within our own species need to understand the necessity of why the vast majority of them should have less children.

_____________________________________________________

ASIDE: Within our own species females tend to
be more selective of mates. This is for a variety of reasons. One, males can technically have as many children as they can
have partners, while females are limited to say twenty children or less in a lifetime. Two, males have very little to lose
from sexual encounters and much to gain besides climax. The loss of a little genetic material and energy is far outweighed
by the prospect of progeny. Females on the other hand have nine months of pregnancy, the actual birth, and only then does
the fun begin. So we can see why females are often far more willing to control promiscuity than their counterparts and why
they should be targeted for achieving zero population growth.

_____________________________________________________

We must insure anyone and everyone
has contraceptives available when they are needed. There are hundreds of millions [if not billions of people] throughout the
world who are unable to purchase contraceptives simply because they are too expensive or unavailable. [3]

Currently the hierarchies of a
number of religions stand in the way of promoting contraceptives in any form whatsoever. Those of us with scientific backgrounds
must use scriptural arguments in helping to sway those of a more spiritual persuasion. For example, when advocating zero population
growth often we are countered with comments such as, "But God said be fruitful and multiply."

Yes, God did say that, but please
tell us how many people did he give this order too? ... We'll give you a hint, ... ... a guy named Noah was in charge. You
see simply because God says something at one time does not always mean it is applicable each and every day. God told Jonah
to go to Nineveh and speak out against its sin; does that mean each and every one of us should go to Nineveh? Do people go
around saying, "God said go to Nineveh!" No of course not, yet you are forgetting when God told our ancestors to be fruitful
and multiply he was speaking to eight individuals or less.

For scriptural backing on not having any
children please see Luke 23:27-31:

A large crowd of people followed him;
amoung them were some women who were weeping and wailing for him. Jesus turned to them and said, "WOMEN OF JERUSALEM! DO NOT
CRY FOR ME, BUT FOR YOURSELVES AND YOUR CHILDREN. FOR THE DAYS ARE COMING WHEN PEOPLE WILL SAY, 'HOW LUCKY ARE THE WOMEN WHO
NEVER HAD CHILDREN, WHO NEVER BORE BABIES, WHO NEVER NURSED THEM! THAT WILL BE THE TIME WHEN PEOPLE SAY TO THE MOUNTAINS,
'FALL ON US!' AND TO THE HILLS 'HIDE US!' FOR IF SUCH THINGS AS THESE ARE DONE WHEN THE WOOD IS GREEN, WHAT WILLHAPPEN WHEN IT IS DRY?" [4]

There are those of us in the Alliance
yearning to convert to Catholicism, but cannot until the Church openly encourages zero population growth [and opens their
library]. In The Hammer of God, AC Clarke fantasizes what a future Pope might say when the Church begins advocating
the obvious:

~ "four centuries ago, in
the year 1632, my predecessor, Pope Urban the Eighth, made an appalling blunder. He allowed his friend Galileo to be condemned
for teaching what we now know to be a fundamental truth, that the Earth goes around the sun. Now, alas the time has come to
admit an even more tragic error. Through its stubborn opposition to family planning by artificial means, the Church has wrecked
billions of lives --and, ironically, been largely responsible for promoting the sin of abortion among those too poor to support
the children they were forced to bring into the world. This policy has brought our species to the verge of ruin. Gross overpopulation
has stripped the Planet Earth of its resources and polluted the entire global environment. The goal is to establish the often-discussed
but never achieved, except in times of war and plague, zero population growth as quickly -- and humanely --- as possible.
Even that may not be sufficient; we may need negative population growth. For the next few generations the one-child family
may have to be the norm. The Church is wise enough not to fight against the inevitable, especially in this radically changed
situation. Abortion remains a crime, and will always be so. But now there is no longer any excuse --or any need-- for it.
AC CLARKE The Hammer of God ENCYCLICAL

[4] For those of us more scientifically inclined
we must realize that the great religions all have the same foundations for obvious reasons. With the advent of nuclear fission
in 1945, our species' own self-destruction became not only a possibility, but in all likelihood a probability. Before the arrival
of megatonnage weaponry, the idea of compassion and love for others seemed almost laughable. It still does to the less gifted
amoung us. Yet today, ... ... as we gaze across our globe and see the destruction left in our species wake, we understand
why extremely advanced civilizations amidst the heavens [God] might whisper to us once in a great while; reminding us that
the day will come when we have the ability to destroy ourselves and we had better have outgrown our childish tendencies when
it does.